Hi Trevor,
> I'd actually suggest changing out the default dynamics definitions
> in the distro,
> but not sure if that's the behavior anyone else would actually want.
I actually reiterate a suggestion I made more than a year ago: I
think Lilypond should align all markup (including dynamic text) to
*BASELINES* rather than <whatever the current code says>. I find the
same irritating workarounds required just to line up two adjacent
markups, never mind dynamics. =\
To answer your implicit question explicitly... "YES, that's behaviour
I would want!". =)
Right: you're totally right that what we're wanting here is basline-aligned dynamics. My scheme defs are just a hacked way of getting that.
In fact, come to think of it, I think it was a comment by Werner a year or two ago to the effect of "yeah, baseline alignment leaves a lot to be desired; maybe better to find another way of doing it" that lead me down the other path ...
Dunno what's involved in alignment handling; font stuff is magic to me. If HW or one of the metafont gurus ever decide to implement baseline alignment for dynamics, I'll find a way to pony up some money!
:-)